감봉처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a person newly appointed as an administrative assistant on September 1, 2003 and served in the procurement market B team from January 27, 2016.
B. On February 19, 2018, the Defendant requested the Central Disciplinary Committee to take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the grounds of the following disciplinary grounds (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”).
On May 2016, the Plaintiff forced the victim (the victim (the victim) and the victim (the victim 28 years of age) to visit the front door of his/her dwelling, and forced him/her to "self-employed" three times. However, the Plaintiff's act of the victim's escape and his/her attempted to commit the act of committing himself/herself is subject to the disposition of non-prosecution due to "non-prosecution without suspicion (defluence of evidence)" by the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office (Article 4 of the Regulations on Handling Public Officials Offenses by Public Officials, even if he/she was subject to the disposition of "non-prosecution without suspicion (defluence of evidence)" by the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office (Article 63 (1) and (2) of the Enforcement Rule of the State Public Officials Act, he/she shall request the competent disciplinary committee to decide on the disciplinary action under the State Public Officials Act if the case falls under the grounds for disciplinary action under the State Public Officials Act.
C. On June 15, 2018, the Central Disciplinary Committee decided on the ground that the instant disciplinary cause constituted grounds for disciplinary action under Article 78(1) of the State Public Officials Act in violation of Article 63 of the same Act, thereby constituting grounds for disciplinary action. On July 4, 2018, the Defendant issued a reduction of salary for three months with respect to the instant disciplinary cause (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The plaintiff is dissatisfied with this and filed a petition review with the Ministry of Personnel Management, but on October 18, 2018.